Question MSI MEG ACE - i9-9900k OC to 5,0gz Help
Question MSI MEG ACE - i9-9900k OC to 5,0gz Help
Hello, I'm feeling a bit overwhelmed... I've checked numerous profiles and guides, even the one from MSI. Eventually, I managed to stabilize my system at 5.0gz with a temperature of 1,315v, but my temperatures remain elevated. At Cinebech, I see 94c, while on Intel Extreme Tuning Benchmark it's 93c. In Prime95 without the AVX feature, I get around 85c after 30 minutes. During gameplay with full graphics settings (Blade and Soul), I reach a maximum of 60c. When I only enable Turbo Boost (4,8zh), I see 66c. On Cinebech with Intel Extreme Tuning Benchmark, it's 66c as well. On 5.0gz I get 93c and at 4,8zh I also get 66c. It's strange considering my system specs:
I9-9900k
MSI Meg Ace
Zotac 980ti Extreme Amp 6GB
32GB RAM (G.Trident 3000 CL15) @ 1.35V
Corsair AX1000W PSU
Watercooling: EK-KIT X360 (Monoblock for the motherboard)
My OC settings:
https://ibb.co/Wgq1mT9
https://ibb.co/qJbg7Y5
https://ibb.co/LvphJzF
https://ibb.co/SKBr0Xm
https://ibb.co/HFfZT07
https://ibb.co/r0WWn2k
Can you help me understand why I'm consistently getting such high temperatures on 5.0gz at 1,315v?
This is what occurs with the 9900k – your cooling capacity sets the limit. The only method to lower temperatures is by reducing voltage. Once you reach a certain point, especially at "x" overclock levels, you encounter thermal boundaries. Exceeding 90°C is likely for the 9900k running at 5GHz with AVX instructions. That’s why some users skip prime95; they opt for avx-compatible alternatives like aida64 instead. To manage temperatures effectively, you’ll need to delid and use direct die cooling.
For the 9900k, here are the details:
https://siliconlottery.com/pages/statistics
Temperatures and performance ranges:
- 4.80GHz – 4.60GHz – 1.275V – 100%
- 4.90GHz – 4.70GHz – 1.287V – Top 91%
- 5.00GHz – 4.80GHz – 1.300V – Top 30%
- 5.10GHz – 4.90GHz – 1.312V – Top 5%
Consider trying an AVX offset to help with heat management, as silicon lottery supports it. Most performance gains still come from boosting your RAM speed and optimizing its timings.
You currently have 32GB of RAM (g.Trident 3000 CL15). The challenge with the 9900k is that achieving an overclock above 3800MHz demands fast RAM. With a RAM speed of 3800CL15/IF1900 and optimized timings, the clock speed could drop to 11300–11600 cycles per second. PBO and scalar x10 would be needed for speeds above 11500, and on a cooler day, around 11600. Faster RAM can prevent the 9900k from sustaining such high overclocks, but only if you adjust the RAM’s timings accordingly.
Thanks for your question. When playing games with full graphics settings, a cost of 50-60c seems reasonable. You can try overclocking your current RAM, but it may depend on the specific model and stability. It's important to test for at least a few days to see how it performs.
RAM overclocking can be challenging. You must use memtest to verify the configurations. Any adjustments above the standard should be tested, requiring at least four complete runs of memetest. The process typically takes around two hours. After that, run prime95 and aida64 memory tests. You should achieve around 50-60°C during gameplay, which is a consistent high operating temperature. The problem with prime95 on avx will only appear when using tasks like HEVC (high-efficiency video coding, also known as H.265), which is essentially as intense as prime95's small FFT.
If you're seeing 60c or less in games, it's acceptable. At 5.0ghz @ 1,315v, the vcore is within a reasonable range based on silicon availability. The likely cause for elevated temperatures seems to be heavy AVX processing. A temperature of around 90c is probable. Your thermal performance matches mine. Reducing heat requires lowering the vcore, and an AVX offset might also assist. Stress testing over several hours is essential to verify stability. The screenshot indicates four cores exceeding 90c, with the peak at 93c; your lowest core reads 85c, while the highest reaches 93c. Personally, I wouldn't beat a CPU with an IHS rating. I'd definitely avoid overheating completely. For more details, see: https://forums. The Original Ralph mentions an IHS problem. If you review the referenced paper, you'll notice Gigabyte achieves similar temperatures. https://www.gigabyte.com/fileupload/glob...25/946.pdf Their highest core is 97c and lowest is 88c. This comes from Prime 95 Small FFTs with AVX, using a 1.3volts vcore.
I would just have to rely on my own judgment. I plan to check the temperatures for a while.